All metaphors are structural; all are ontological; and many are orientational

"The division of metaphors into three types—orienta-tional, ontological, and structural—was artificial. All metaphors are structural (in that they map structures to structures); all are ontological (in that they create target domain entities); and many are orientational (in that they map orientational image-schemas)." (#60 4298)

structural metaphors

"Structural metaphors (such as RATIONAL ARGUMENT IS WAR) provide the richest source of such elaboration. Structural metaphors allow us to do much more than just orient concepts, refer to them, quantify them, etc., as we do with simple orientational and ontological metaphors; they allow us, in addition, to use one highly structured and clearly delineated concept to structure another." (#60 1119)

All metaphors are structural; all are ontological; and many are orientational → ...

"The division of metaphors into three types—orienta-tional, ontological, and structural—was artificial. All metaphors are structural (in that they map structures to structures); all are ontological (in that they create target domain entities); and many are orientational (in that they map orientational image-schemas)." (#60 4298)

primary metaphors → ...

"Grady showed that complex metaphors arise from primary metaphors that are directly grounded in the everyday experience that links our sensory-motor experience to the domain of our subjective judgments." (#60 4152)
"There are primary metaphors for time, causation, events, morality, emotions, and other domains that are central to human thought. Such metaphors also provide a superstructure for our systems of complex metaphorical thought and language." (#60 4184)
"Primary metaphor is a term named by Joseph Grady for the basic connection that exist between subjective or abstract experiences such as good and concrete experiences such as up. These two concepts usually correlate in experience, and form the primary metaphor good is up. Likewise there is a correlation between seeing and knowing forming the primary metaphor seeing is knowing. Two such primary metaphors are used when understanding an expression such as glass ceiling." - Wikipedia

LABOR IS A RESOURCE and TIME IS A RESOURCE metaphors

"LABOR IS A RESOURCE and TIME IS A RESOURCE Both of these metaphors are culturally grounded in our experience with material resources." (#60 1184)
"Material resources are typically raw materials or sources of fuel." (#60 1185)
"A material resource is a kind of substance can be quantified fairly precisely can be assigned a value per unit quantity serves a purposeful end is used up progressively as it serves its purpose" (#60 1190)
"LABOR is a kind of activity (recall: AN ACTIVITY IS A SUBSTANCE) can be quantified fairly precisely (in terms of time) can be assigned a value per unit serves a purposeful end is used up progressively as it serves it purpose" (#60 1200)
"TIME is a kind of (abstract) substance can be quantified fairly precisely can be assigned a value per unit serves a purposeful end is used up progressively as it serves its purpose" (#60 1207)
"These two SUBSTANCE metaphors permit labor and time to be quantified—that is, measured, conceived of as being progressively "used up," and assigned monetary values; they also allow us to view time and labor as things that can be "used" for various ends." (#60 1216)
"The quantification of labor in terms of time, together with the view of time as serving a purposeful end, induces a notion of LEISURE TIME, which is parallel to the concept LABOR TIME. In a society like ours, where inactivity is not considered a purposeful end, a whole industry devoted to leisure activity has evolved. As a result, LEISURE TIME becomes a RESOURCE too—to be spent productively, used wisely, saved up, budgeted, wasted, lost, etc. What is hidden by the RESOURCE metaphors for labor and time is the way our concepts of LABOR and TIME affect our concept of LEISURE, turning it into something remarkably like LABOR" (#60 1227)

arguments

"We construct arguments when we need to show the connections between things that are obvious—that we take for granted—and other things that are not obvious. We do this by putting ideas together. These ideas constitute the content of the argument. The things we take for granted are the starting point of the argument. The things we wish to show are the goals that we must reach. As we proceed toward these goals, we make progress by establishing connections. The connections may be strong or weak, and the network of connections has an overall structure. In any argument certain ideas and connections may be more basic than others, certain ideas will be more obvious than others. How good an argument is will depend on its content, the strength of the connections, how directly it establishes the connections, and how easy it is to understand the connections." (#60 1730)